Owners of automatic teller machines are reaping $120 million less, in aggregate, in annual fee revenue from customers from the use of ATMs, an analysis by the payments system department of the Reserve Bank of Australia has found.The RBA provided the estimate in an article in the RBA's quarterly Bulletin, published yesterday. The article surveys trends in use and pricing of ATM transactions in the year since direct charging by ATM owners of ATM users replaced the earlier pricing model in which banks charged each other interchange fees and often passed on those fees, plus a fat margin, to certain users.Thus it is not clear what reduction in net revenue to the industry the estimate of $120 million represents (a topic not addressed by the RBA). There has, however, been a shift in the pattern of fees earned, since ATM owners (and in particular, non-bank owners of ATM fleets) are generating substantial new revenues from the reforms.The RBA review found that the most common ATM fee is $2, which applies at around 88 per cent of ATMs in Australia.Of the balance of the ATM fleet, most charge $1.50 (mainly on ATMs owned by either National Australia Bank or credit unions). Charges were up to $2.50 at a minority of ATMs owned by non-bank entities such as Cashcard and Customers Ltd, while a third independent, iCash Payments, charged $3 on some ATMs.In a few venues, such as poker machine palaces, the fees are as high as $4. The RBA said as yet there is no "time of day" charging for use of ATMs."Foreign" ATM withdrawals fell from around 44 per cent of all transactions before the introduction of direct charging to 38 per cent, a share that has remained reasonably steady over recent months. To that extent, the RBA notes, there is "distinct change in cardholder behaviour".Related changes in cardholder behaviour are a rise in the average value for each withdrawal and increased use of the cash-out option when making payments by Eftpos at the supermarket and other merchants.Balance inquiries reduced by one third to one half over the year, with these also subject to a direct charge, and perhaps a reflection of the fact that consumers in many cases were not aware this service attracted a fee before disclosure became the norm.